Parliament Must Not Be a Battleground, Declares Speaker Malik Ahmad Khan

Lahore -( Asif Iqbal Ch)In a time of heightened political tensions in Punjab’s legislative corridors, Speaker of the Punjab Assembly Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan recently held an informal interaction with journalists where he laid out a comprehensive, constitutionally grounded perspective on the issues of disqualification, parliamentary discipline, and institutional decorum. His remarks reflected not only legal clarity but also political prudence.

Disqualification Reference or Constitutional Question?

The Speaker clarified that the three applications he recently received—submitted by legislators Mujtaba Shuja ur Rehman, Ahmed Iqbal, and Iftikhar Chhachhar—do not constitute formal disqualification references. Instead, these submissions raise constitutional questions that fall under Article 63(2) of the Constitution. According to the article, once a question regarding a member’s disqualification is raised, the Speaker must assess it within 30 days. If no determination is made, the matter automatically proceeds to the Election Commission.

Drawing on precedent, the Speaker reminded reporters of the 2017 instance when Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) submitted a similar plea against Nawaz Sharif under Article 63. The then-Speaker of the National Assembly, Sardar Ayaz Sadiq, was approached, and the matter eventually led to the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that resulted in the former Prime Minister’s disqualification.

Limits of Political Instructions

Speaker Malik raised a key constitutional query: Can a political party issue directives to its parliamentary wing that are in conflict with the Constitution? He emphasized that a political party and its parliamentary party operate under different legal expectations and obligations. Any instruction that breaches constitutional provisions—particularly related to the oath of office—cannot be deemed legitimate.

He noted that PTI members had deviated from their oath, and this very breach was the basis of the complaints submitted to him. “If Nawaz Sharif can be disqualified under a structured legal argument, then oath violations also merit legal scrutiny,” he stated.

Protest, Not Pandemonium

Speaker Malik acknowledged the opposition’s democratic right to protest, but underscored that protests must remain within constitutional and parliamentary limits. “Turning the House into a battleground or launching verbal attacks, throwing books, and abusing members—especially women—is not acceptable,” he said. He revealed that Raheela Khadim Hussain, a government MPA, had filed a formal harassment complaint and was now so disheartened that she planned to leave the country.

He urged all members to maintain the sanctity of the assembly, asserting that “parliament is the home of democracy, and its dignity must be protected at all costs.”

Towards a Written Accord

One of the most notable points made by the Speaker was his proposal for both the treasury and opposition benches to bring forth a written commitment—pledging adherence to the Constitution and respect for the House. He made it clear that he had not made any unilateral decisions yet, but would arrive at a conclusion within three days after thoughtful consideration.

“If I find that I have no authority to proceed with the reference, I will advise the complainants to seek remedy through the courts,” he added. He stressed that the constitutional framework does not allow arbitrary punishment or politicized revenge; everything must follow legal pathways.

Equal Rights, Equal Responsibility

Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan affirmed that equal rights will be ensured for both sides of the aisle in the Punjab Assembly. He emphasized that the speech of any Chief Minister—be it Shehbaz Sharif, Parvez Elahi, Usman Buzdar, or Nawaz Sharif—has never been blocked, and it was against the traditions of the House to disrupt such addresses.

In reference to the wider political discourse, he mentioned that there are currently 37 pending election-related petitions, including 12 against PTI and 21 against PML-N candidates. He also expressed complete confidence in the legitimacy of the vote that brought Ahmed Saeed to power, stating he could “swear at the Kaaba” to its authenticity.

Conclusion

Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan’s statements reflect a deep commitment to constitutionalism, balanced governance, and the restoration of decorum in parliamentary proceedings. As Pakistan’s democratic institutions navigate turbulence, such voices offer not only guidance but a much-needed reminder: Parliament is not a battleground—it is a forum for legislation, debate, and accountability.

Whether this moment results in disqualification, reconciliation, or further confrontation, one thing is certain—the future of Punjab’s Assembly now rests not just on law, but on restraint, reason, and mutual respect.